Letter: The minimum wage

By Patrick Glynn, Havelock

Published: Thursday, April 25, 2013 at 11:37 AM.

The minimum wage in the
United States
, as set under current federal law, is far too low to be provide for any upward mobility in our current cultural, political and economic climate. $7.25 an hour, while sufficient for those who are dependent on their parents, is not enough to provide for the basic necessities for a modern standard of living — one that we preach is the epitome of the developed world. In reality, a person making just over $17,000 a year, working full time is not a sustainable model for economic growth. Not for the individual; not for the economy in general. Well, at least not the economies that matter to our daily living.

People that work for the minimum wage often find other jobs to supplement their living expenses, when possible. This means part time wages, mostly sans benefits, are earned exclusively to pay for housing, food, gas, utilities and, in an increasingly few cases, basic health care costs. This existence may be livable by the definition of poverty, but it is not prosperous or up lifting. One cannot take time off from their minimum wage jobs to learn new skills to make more money, or do any of the other things that are needed to “lift one’s self out of the trench of poverty.”

It is important to note, those working for the minimum wage are not dependent on certain assistances by choice, but by necessity. Medicaid, food stamps and other public aid are designed for this purpose. However, it is not enough.

This is why President Obama called for an increase in the minimum wage in his State of the
Union
. The increase to $9 an hour may seem large, and for many people it will be. However, the problem with minimum wage increases is that it does not drive consumer spending. It simply institutionalizes the cost of living. This is why, instead of the minimum wage increase that the President has advocated, a real solution would be a guaranteed income.

A guaranteed income — one guaranteed by the government, not forced on private businesses — would alleviate the burden on the local businesses to increase wages across the board, while ensuring a living wage for all workers. This wage could be regulated in the same manner that taxes are. Where there are limits to who receives what kind of benefits. For example, a 17 year old working part time after school while living at home does not need to make the same, nor should make the same, as a mother of 2 working 60 hours a week. The same mother, however, should not be forced to work that 60 hour work week to still live pay check to pay check.

In the
United States
, we already have a system of guaranteed income that is not only highly successful, but highly popular— Social Security. And while it needs reforms, and is no way perfect, it is a model for a system that has helped millions of otherwise impoverished Americans enjoy a certain standard of living previously unimaginable. Imagine, then, if the caveat of “65 years old” were removed from this statute. Imagine all Americans enjoying a savings account, a sense of economic freedom and, most importantly, local buying power.

The minimum wage in the United States, as set under current federal law, is far too low to be provide for any upward mobility in our current cultural, political and economic climate. $7.25 an hour, while sufficient for those who are dependent on their parents, is not enough to provide for the basic necessities for a modern standard of living — one that we preach is the epitome of the developed world. In reality, a person making just over $17,000 a year, working full time is not a sustainable model for economic growth. Not for the individual; not for the economy in general. Well, at least not the economies that matter to our daily living.

People that work for the minimum wage often find other jobs to supplement their living expenses, when possible. This means part time wages, mostly sans benefits, are earned exclusively to pay for housing, food, gas, utilities and, in an increasingly few cases, basic health care costs. This existence may be livable by the definition of poverty, but it is not prosperous or up lifting. One cannot take time off from their minimum wage jobs to learn new skills to make more money, or do any of the other things that are needed to “lift one’s self out of the trench of poverty.”

It is important to note, those working for the minimum wage are not dependent on certain assistances by choice, but by necessity. Medicaid, food stamps and other public aid are designed for this purpose. However, it is not enough.

This is why President Obama called for an increase in the minimum wage in his State of the Union. The increase to $9 an hour may seem large, and for many people it will be. However, the problem with minimum wage increases is that it does not drive consumer spending. It simply institutionalizes the cost of living. This is why, instead of the minimum wage increase that the President has advocated, a real solution would be a guaranteed income.

A guaranteed income — one guaranteed by the government, not forced on private businesses — would alleviate the burden on the local businesses to increase wages across the board, while ensuring a living wage for all workers. This wage could be regulated in the same manner that taxes are. Where there are limits to who receives what kind of benefits. For example, a 17 year old working part time after school while living at home does not need to make the same, nor should make the same, as a mother of 2 working 60 hours a week. The same mother, however, should not be forced to work that 60 hour work week to still live pay check to pay check.

In the United States, we already have a system of guaranteed income that is not only highly successful, but highly popular— Social Security. And while it needs reforms, and is no way perfect, it is a model for a system that has helped millions of otherwise impoverished Americans enjoy a certain standard of living previously unimaginable. Imagine, then, if the caveat of “65 years old” were removed from this statute. Imagine all Americans enjoying a savings account, a sense of economic freedom and, most importantly, local buying power.

While I applaud the President in taking a stand to raise the level of income for all Americans, a minimum wage increase will only serve the profits of national corporations, whose subsidiaries collect on the living costs that the current wage owners pay into monthly. A guaranteed income will bolster consumer spending, while minimizing costs of small businesses that cannot afford wage hikes in a recessed economy and establishes a floor bellow which no working American will fall for circumstances of fate or position.